Warning: This is a rant

[msagara]

This is not really about business, or about the business, so if that's what you're reading for, this is your great big warning signpost: Stop Here. It is indirectly about writing, and, I think, professional attitude.

Those of you who've read this far know I still work in a bookstore. And that I like working in a bookstore. I like putting people together with books that they'll enjoy. When I first started, I had certain tastes and a certain pre-conditioning which, over time, I've let go. People read for all sorts of reasons. I know this because I do.

But while I'm happy to say something is a guilty pleasure -- pause for digression, because I'm genuinely curious: Are there many men out there who use this phrase? And regardless, do you consider the phrase "guilty pleasure" to be a perjorative? My F&SF review column used to be called Guilty Pleasures, and the title was the one thing about the column that Gordon Van Gelder didn't like. Kris Rusch knew exactly what the title meant, and for her, there was no negative connotation in the title; Gordon Van Gelder felt that it implied that reading could be considered something to be done furtively, and he considered all reading, in an age of (much) TV and other more easily accessible media to be worthwhile.

Right. End of digression. While I'm happy to say that something is a guilty pleasure or something is entertaining fluff, I actually expect the entertaining fluff to be entertaining. I consider the words to be important; I consider the structure to be important; I consider the tone to be important -- in fact, I expect the book to be a well-written book of its type. Anything I say I like has value to me.

Not everything I read comes under this heading. There are books I read that I consider to be more weighty, and I oddly enough expect the same damn thing from them: that they be well written.

What defines well-written is entirely dependent on the book itself, of course. If I pick up a book that claims to be a love story, then damn it, I want a love story. I will feel cheated and thoroughly annoyed if it turns out to be a grim, realistic and downbeat novel about the intricacies of a spectacular failure of a relationship. And if something is touted as a genuine historical novel, then damn it, I want the sense of social and cultural reality that will inform the characters, their views, their motivations, and their interactions; I don't just want the trappings and the odd historical item thrown in as set dressing.

If the novel is a mystery novel, I don't want a great big signboard that has blinking neon lights which point instantly to the killer. (Rosemary Edghill's Bast novels are an exception to this rule, but I didn't read those for the mystery).

I could go on and on. People have heard me go on and on, so I'll spare you; you can imagine the rest.

Here comes the rant. An author I don't know came into the store to pick up copies of a magazine that their first professional sale was published in. This is a high point in a person's professional life, and one should be justifiably proud and pleased about this. But. The author then looked at me and asked me to point them to one of the Harlequin Luna "things". I reasonably asked, "Which one?"

Full disclosure: I've sold three novels to Luna. This will become immediately relevant.

The author in question then said, "Just point me to any one of them." I then pointed out, in that growing state of something that can be called "inflexible" that there were, in fact, a number of published titles of varying different sub-genres, some contemporary, some set in another world, and as in any line, of varying quality. The author thought about this for a moment, and then said, "Well, give me something in the middle, then, so I can get a feel for what they're looking for."

"In the middle?"

Well, the author reasoned, it's not like they're actually any good, so one could pick up what they needed to make their own submission based on reading any one of them. After all, it's Harlequin. The author had no plans to submit their best material, because, after all, Harlequin wouldn't buy their best work, so that would be waste of time.

At this point, I'm turning red. Or purple. I point out that the line started with a hardcover Lackey publication, and that the subsequent volumes (by title and author) were all done in trade paperback. The author is not going to waste their money on one of those books in trade. I tell the author that the line is not a category line, and the books are not written to formula, which seemed to come as a surprise; that the question would be similar to someone walking into the SF/F bookstore and saying, "Just give me one of these middling books so I can see what publishers of genre fiction are buying; it's not like they're buying anything good after all."

I started in on my lecture. Actually, it's not a canned lecture, since I very seldom have people come in with this type of question. Very, very seldom. It's more a spontaneous outraged diatribe, which was interrupted by the very reasonable person also standing behind the counter at the same time who (I think it might even have been Graydon) pointed out that I did, in fact, have another customer waiting behind the author. The second customer wanted to purchase the book in his hand today (and possibly unscorched, but the latter was implied). So… I cut short the sputtering, took the poor bystander's money, and watched the author walk out of the store.

I've been grinding my teeth since then.

And. Well. This is a Journal, right?

The point is not that the author dismissed the Luna line. I could live with that. People dismiss things they haven't read all the time, and I've generally learned to go with that. It's the fact the author professed a desire to write for the Luna line, submitting work that was, in their estimation, less than their best effort because the publisher wasn't interested in anything good that made -- and is making -- me do the slow burn.

Two reasons for this. First, the entirely egotistical reason. I sold to that line, and I don't submit work that is not my best in the form that I'm attempting. Period. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing well. Whether or not I succeeded is beside the point, and will be judged by the readers of the book long after it's left my hands; the point, for me, is that I made every effort to do my best work. This book made me nervous because it was tonally different than anything else I've written, and is the first book I've done in a long while with which I pestered poor alpha-readers. To imply that Luna will only buy the dregs of an author's work is to impugn my work ethic. I don't care if you don't like the damn book. But assuming that because you don't like it, I must have turned in only the inferior trunk novel or equivalent is damn insulting. This, however, was unintentional on the visiting author's part, and can be forgiven; it's not like I wear a big sign.

I've written 2 short stories in the Valdemar universe. The second one almost killed me; it took six weeks during which I did no work at all on anything else (which caused extreme novel deadline pressure), but I'm just not proud of the story. Not because it's not a good story, but because -- for me -- it failed to achieve the right tone. The first story I wrote for the first Valdemar anthology did achieve the right tone, and I struggled through about 12 attempts to make the second story work. In the end, with two extensions, I finished the story I had and sent it in; it was accepted, but it still causes me pangs and a sense of failure.

I've written a Buffy tie-in short story ("Dust"). Just one, because while it worked for me, I don't think it was met with any great approval by its reading audience, and because of this, I ceased my attempts to write a novel (I loved that show for the first three seasons).

At no point did I think I could write a piece of garbage for either of these two universes. At no point did I decide that somehow this work was not going to be my best work. The universes in question were not my universe, and that caused me some technical difficulties, because I couldn't shift the rules to match my emotional tones -- but I had agreed to do the work, and I wanted the work to succeed for the readers that already existed.

And that brings us neatly to the second part of this rant, and the second thing that really, really annoyed me, (which I find far harder to excuse): If you can take this attitude, it means that you're showing contempt for your readers. I may not always write with the reader in mind; I often write with complete emotional focus, and in that state, all that exists is the book (not food, not sleep, not real life -- just the book). But I never write with contempt for my audience. If I don't understand who that audience is, that's almost beside the point. How can you connect with an audience that you have nothing but contempt for? How do you grace your work with intelligence and heart in that circumstance?

Comments

[zhaneel69.livejournal.com]

*clap*

Okay, I need your real name to go get one of the Luna novels 'cause I'm thinking of submitting there because I've been impressed with the author line-up. And because I like the idea of a fantasy influenced romance.

I'm working on a novel proposal for Wizards of the Coast currently. It is a gaming novel. And I'm trying my hardest. My writing, in my opinion, is crap for this novel proposal and sounds much like your Valdemar expereince. I'm trying my hardest, but I just don't like what I'm writing. I *know* it is because I'm playing in someone else's universe and feeling like I don't know everything and fearing contradicting the creator in some way.

Zhaneel

[msagara.livejournal.com]

My real name is Michelle Sagara <wry g>. My married name (which I also consider real, since that's the one all the teachers use <wry g>) is Michelle West, and I write under both names. Or sometimes under Michelle Sagara West, although that one is usually an accident.

My first Luna novel won't be out until November 2005, though.

The Luna line is interesting. The Lackey novel is entirely a Lackey novel, and if you like her books, you'll like it. The Asaro novel is very different from her Skolian novels, so that's half and half. The Zettel novel (the Arthurian) is hugely different from her SF, and somewhat more like her Tor fantasy, although not really. Which is to say -- they're all different. The suricattus's novel, STAYING DEAD, is the first contemporary fantasy Luna has done; they really are across the board in story, tone, feel, level of romance, etc.

The misperception at the moment is that Luna is a fantasy influenced romance line; it's really not that. My first Luna novel actually has no romance in it at all, although it does have several relationships with differing degrees of tangled history. For the best idea of what Luna is looking for, this is a fabulous interview with the executive editor of the line, and I based my submission almost entirely on it.

http://www.crescentblues.com/6_4issue/int_hussey.shtml

As for the WOTC novel, you really do have my sympathies, as you might have guessed <rueful g>. The general type-A-ness of my personality makes it hard for me to not know everything about the world -- and even when I've built one, it still slides out from under me. When it's my work...

[janni.livejournal.com]

When I was 15, a friend and I imagined we could stay up in one night, write a romance with minimal effort, sell it, get rich, and write books we cared about off the resulting proceeds.

At 15, one can be forgiven for such attitudes. As an adult, having made an attempt to actually write, one realizes it's not that easy.

When I wrote the Phantom Rider books, which were work for hire, it quickly became apparent to me that whether I wanted them to be or not (and I did want them to be), these books were going to be the very best thing I could write at that time.

Even when you write your best, it's never going to be good enough. I can't afford--even issues of conscience aside--to write anything less.

[matociquala.livejournal.com]

What puzzles me is how one can write *anything* that isn't one's best effort.

I mean, I may blow it. I'm sure I do blow it.

But how do you... dial down craftsmanship? Either you show up and write, or you don't. It's not like you can leave half your brain or half your typing fingers at home.

[sartorias.livejournal.com]

The chances are pretty good that someone who approaches a project with that attitude is going to turn in a piece that really reads like they put no effort into it.

[affinity8.livejournal.com]

Let's see if I can post without putting my foot into my mouth.

This new author obviously doesn't respect the romance genre. For the sake of argument we'll just lump together all the Regencies and historicals and Gothics, etc. There are many things *I* don't respect about romance novels--the perfect teeth and grooming of Highlanders roaming around the 16th century, for instance, or the ocean of beautiful heroines and handsome heroes. Yet when romance is done well--and I'm thinking Nora Roberts here--it's fun, it's escapist, it's enjoyable, and I like it. I also respect the audience for romance novels, not just because it's *huge,* but because the readers obviously know what they like and demand that you meet and/or exceed certain expectations. Anyone who thinks they can dash off a romance in a half-assed fashion will soon have a rude awakening. As you said, you can't have contempt for your readers.

That author is lumping the Harlequin Luna line in with his/her preconceived notions or experience with other romance novels. However misguided, at least he or she is trying to do some homework. I've got four Luna books on my shelf and have mixed feelings about them. I was especially disappointed one of them, because I feel the author did indeed "dumb down" her narrative, for whatever reason. I don't think it was her best work. I think it was targeted to be cross-genre and as such didn't succeed in either one. But that's imho.

[msagara.livejournal.com]

I adore Eva Ibbotson, whom many romance readers adore. I was given her as an example of a romance author I'd like, although another romance writer says she's classed as Georgette Heyer -- i.e. not a romance writer, but one that romance readers like. She reminds me much of Robin McKinley, absent the fantasy elements.

Let me say this: I have no problem whatsoever with people hating every Luna title they touch. Or every fantasy novel. Or every SF novel. Or every military SF novel. At the store, this is common; some people read everything, and some people are so allergic to specific sub-genres they break out in hives when they walk past one on the shelves <wry g>.

My objection is not that the author has contempt for them -- because this does happen frequently, and in any genre -- but rather that, contempt in tact, the author intends to write one, which implies contempt for the reader, to me.

There was a very funny story about an author who tried to write a romance novel, and confessed that she did write one that a friend who writes in both fields read and ... hated. I'm paraphrasing, because I don't remember it all, but the reader said, "Your heroine is a dishrag, your hero is a jerk, and nothing anyone does makes any sense!" And the frustrated author replied, "Exactly! I have faithfully captured everything I've read."

To which the reader replied, "Stick to SF."

(It was the author who told this story, btw). I think there are readers with a tin ear for romance (it all sounds bad), and writers are also readers (I've mentioned there are agents with tin ears for different genres as well), and although it can be strenuously argued that my first four books fit the romance paradigm (they were my beauty and the beast books, although I didn't realize it until a perceptive reader point this out), I can't quite figure out how to write it on demand; I don't understand how it all works. I struggle with the idea, because I also understand that easily half of the adult human condition in the industrial world involves attraction, romance, love, and all the good -- or bad -- that comes out of it.

Someone gave me a Jennie Cruise book (I may be spelling that wrong, and apologize if I offend, but I'm being 'net lazy) and my first thought was "this is witty" and my second was "now where's the plot?"

Because, to me, it read so much like a Tanya Huff novel in terms of dialogue and description -- but without the fantastic elements, or sfnal elements that form the rest of the story into which the romance is an element.

[dark-geisha.livejournal.com]

That's very insulting. The image makes me cringe. They're not only insulting Luna; they're insulting Harlequin as a whole, and since they sell a lot of books to a lot of satisfied customers, they're obviously doing something right. Going in with that kind of attitude is bound to leak over into the actual writing.

And anyway, why would you want to write something that you obviously have no respect for? The readers will smell it from a mile away, and that's not going to go over well for anyone involved.

[msagara.livejournal.com]

That's very insulting. The image makes me cringe. They're not only insulting Luna; they're insulting Harlequin as a whole, and since they sell a lot of books to a lot of satisfied customers, they're obviously doing something right. Going in with that kind of attitude is bound to leak over into the actual writing.

And anyway, why would you want to write something that you obviously have no respect for? The readers will smell it from a mile away, and that's not going to go over well for anyone involved.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel -- except shorter <wry g>. One of these days, shorter will be something I'm better at. Probably <she says, eyeing HOUSE WAR> not soon, but one of these days.

Or: If I think you're an idiot, what on earth do I have to say to you that won't be either insulting or condescending? Pretty much nothing, unless I expect that the readership in general is masochistic enough to pay me to insult them.

[moeyknight.livejournal.com]

Thanks for this rant! I've had it often (usually just to myself) when people put down things I like to read. I'd like to think that most readers are smart enough to know when what they are reading was written with contempt - I've read books that I've felt were written this way - and while I've read books I didn't like, these books make me angry. That author needs to rethink why they are writing anything. Why would you write something you didn't even like?

Not to mention, how can you possibly get a feel for a genre or line by reading one book?

(I added you to my friends list - hope that's OK.)

[msagara.livejournal.com]

Why would you write something you didn't even like?

Not to mention, how can you possibly get a feel for a genre or line by reading one book?

(I added you to my friends list - hope that's OK.)

Actually, that's another good way of posing the question: Why would you write something you didn't like? I confess that there are times when, during the slog of a book, I hate everything about it, or am sure everyone else will, or a combination of the two -- but the thing that drives me is a certain passion & love of the story itself. I may blow it. None of us hit the high notes 100% of the time. But.

I consider the friends list to be a reading list, and I'm perfectly happy to be read, so yes, I'm fine with that <g>.

[oneminutemonkey.livejournal.com]

AWESOME rant, Michelle. I completely feel your pain ... and wrath. :>
I've read Laura Anne's Luna book, and Mercedes' Luna book, and thoroughly enjoyed them both; STAYING DEAD more than 95% of the books I've read this year, and FAIRY GODMOTHER more than many of Misty's other books. They are the high points of the Luna line for me thus far, for separate reasons. And putting them together, I wouldn't be able to judge the whole line, or even be able to say what the line was specifically about, because they're so different. Which is a good thing. Heck, I have some ideas I really want to develop enough to pitch to Luna, now that I've seen what they're willing to accept. :> Not because I think they take crap or anything, but because I think my ideas fit them.

Blathering aside, I love your attitude. :>

[dancinghorse.livejournal.com]

Also a Luna author here--I've got next month's release. I did not write the book for this line, I wrote it as a departure and a breakthrough and a thoroughly genre-fantasy project, and lo and behold, after the auction flurry had died down, Luna had it. And then I discovered I'd written a straight-down-the-middle Luna book. My brief from Killer Agent was "write a romantic fantasy with a strong heroine and a sexy hero and a magical system no one has seen before." That's not what I'd call an easy out.

I wouldn't waste much more stomach lining on Author Wannabe. They will find right good and quick that Luna is a tough line to get into, and you have to be good. As in, able to write a damned good genre fantasy while also satisfying the expectations of Harlequin's core audience. Not to mention everybody wants in because their print runs and sales expectations blow midlist fantasy right out of the water. And they pay well. They get a Lot of submissions.

I would probably have laughed at this person--not kind of me, but there you are. I do have a problem with know-nothing know-it-alls. My bad. Flaw in my character. Naughty karma. Naughty.

[matociquala.livejournal.com]

Hey, does Luna prefer a happy ending? And are they strictly geared toward heterosexual pairings in their romance?

(Just out of random curiousity)

[loup_noir]

Why would anyone want to submit something that's not their best effort? Don't they realize that those sorts of things haunt you? So, if the publisher did buy it and it got published, it would be mediocre at best. It would be "one of those" books that people pick up, sneer, and put back down, saying, "What a piece of crap."

If you've knocked yourself out, written the story as best you can, loved it, hated it by the time you've finished working on it and then, feeling that you've done the best you can, submitted it, then, even if someone does sneer at it, you know that you're proud of it.

I do no get submitting something just good enough.

Most of the time....

[pixelfish.livejournal.com]

It's not that something isn't their best effort. When people say, "You know, this isn't my best work," they are buffering themselves against rejection. And they are trying to say to their prospective publisher, "Give me a second chance. The next thing you read may very well be my best work." They are taking all those unconcious clues you get when you can tell somebody just isn't digging the things you dig, and trying to justify that person's reaction.

At least that's how I read it.

(This happens a lot on art boards, by the way. I've been on a lot of art boards, and tried to give helpful criticism on piece--ie. perhaps the composition would be improved if you focused on this instead of that, or your colour choice seems to be a bit warm for the atmosphere you say you are trying to convey--and some people just don't take it as assistance, but negativity. They immediately shoot back with, "This isn't my best work." It's a pre-emptive strike against further criticism.)

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

I've been grinding my teeth since then.

Har, I am picturing that. :)

Back in the late '90s I was on a couple of writing lists. Actually, back in the mid '90s I spent time posting to misc.writing (this is when people still used Usenet). Some of the most insightful comments about writing came from the romance writers. Some of them read SF, some of them didn't. But we all felt that the commonality of writing was what was important; genre was merely a matter of taste and technique.

I have heard from many authors, including people in my writing circle, that sometimes taking a different slant on a story can move it out of SF into romance, mystery, "mainstream", or whatever. Genre was just an artistic choice to serve the interests of the story.

The things I don't like about Harlequin Romances aren't the romance elements. It's the formulaic aspect: stories must be 50,000-55,000 words, hero and heroine will have sex around page 170, etc. I suppose it's possible to create art within those constraints, but it looks kind of paint-by-numbers to me. My aunt has rooms full of this stuff.

On the other hand, I like media tie-in books. I used to review them for SF Site (partly because nobody else wanted to review them). But I think it's fun to play with the archetypes, shuffle around how they get along, pull out some unexplored character trait and see where it goes. I've talked to some of the authors, and they're on the same wavelength as what you're saying. If you're going to write in a literary form, you have to respect the form, and you have to write the best story in that form that you got.

It's too bad your customer didn't take your advice. I don't know why anybody would take the time to write something they didn't like.

[mmarques.livejournal.com]

The things I don't like about Harlequin Romances aren't the romance elements. It's the formulaic aspect: stories must be 50,000-55,000 words, hero and heroine will have sex around page 170, etc. I suppose it's possible to create art within those constraints, but it looks kind of paint-by-numbers to me.

Although I haven't tried my hand at Romance, the formula is not a turn off for me. You ask whether "it's possible to create are within ... constraints". Do you consider a sonnet art? There are strong constraints of the form of the poem, and yet much freedom in what is said.

[cristalia.livejournal.com]

Wow. I'm stunned.

I can never understand the people who are obviously just in this for the money. I mean, 1) we all know there's no money in this gig, and 2) readers are psychic about that sort of thing. People can tell when you're jerking them around.

Just...wow. I look forward to seeing this individual get their ass rejected by Luna in a most stinging fashion.

[djonn]

I have been known to use the phrase "guilty pleaasure", though when I'm describing my own genre activity it tends to refer more to TV-watching than to reading material.

With regard to printed SF/F, I tend more often to refer to "popcorn" books, which is to say "suitable and/or intended for light reading". In and of itself, a "popcorn" designation from me isn't a reflector of quality -- one can have Good Popcorn or Stale Popcorn. (FWIW, I would count at least some of the Mercedes Lackey oeuvre as Popcorn -- and of sometimes widely varying degrees of tastiness.)

As for the Luna rant, I feel thy pain. And will happily review Luna titles on their individual merits as the opportunity arises.

[bobafet.livejournal.com]

Yes, I recall said author. You left out the part where she was only buying the copies of the magazine in which her short story had been published *because* her short story had been published in it. Implying, to me, that she wouldn't buy the magazine otherwise.

She struck me as being a bit socially inept, though I couldn't say if that relates to her writing or not.. ;D

[msagara.livejournal.com]

Was it you who stopped me while I was building up to a real rant? I'm embarrassed to say that I don't remember which reasonable person it was who tactfully pointed out that the customer waiting behind said author probably wanted out before he had to listen...

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

I don't get this guy at all. Why would anyone want to submit a story somewhere they think publishes garbage? (Shakes head.)

I may sound a bit snobby by saying that I only submit to places where I would be proud to say I'd been published, but those places can be big press, medium press, small press, completely online, or whatever. And like you, I would never, ever send out anything I thought wasn't my best work--or as close as I could get, since nothing looks to me as good on paper as it did in my head! (And while I've never sold anything to F&SF yet, I am proud to say that J.J.A. has written nice comments about my work in his rejections. :) )

Contempt for your audience: I can't remember who said this now, but as one famous modern author said (and which I hope I never forget), "Never tell your readers to go to hell".

[unwrecked.livejournal.com]

Hey -- great rant. One thing I've found about work-for-hire and writing in someone else's universe is that you've really got to love that universe for it to work. I did one Star Trek story just for fun, and then I was like "Okay, enough of that, I'm ready to move on." If I tried to do more, I probably would've failed.

I also wrote a romance novel on a dare from my wife, and had a ball doing it, but I'm not sure it's all that good. Romance is tough.

Congats on selling three novels to Luna. They are a quality outfit, I think.

[larryhammer]

If you can take this attitude, it means that you're showing contempt for your readers.

Testify, sister!

Oh, and yes I use guilty pleasure. Most often for Laurel Hamilton's books, though not lately (they've stopped being a pleasure).

---L.

[msagara.livejournal.com]

Oddly enough, she was perhaps one of three authors for whom the column name was so very appropriate -- and lately, they've stopped being a pleasure for me as well :/.

[trektone.livejournal.com]

Yes, I use the phrase "guilty pleasure" and do so in various contexts, with emphasis on one word or the other, depending. Rarely in a completely negative way, though.

The interaction with newbie author: dang, it would've been fun to be there!

As a reader/non-writer, I'm not sure I could tell about the "contempt" thing. How would a reader detect whether or not it was the writer's best, under the circumstances? I get that your beef was with the intent, but if the end product is satisfactory to the audience, what's the problem (asks the devil's advocate)?

Oh, and how do you know "Dust" didn't work for the intended audience? Was there a survey? Just curious.

[msagara.livejournal.com]

As a reader/non-writer, I'm not sure I could tell about the "contempt" thing. How would a reader detect whether or not it was the writer's best, under the circumstances? I get that your beef was with the intent, but if the end product is satisfactory to the audience, what's the problem (asks the devil's advocate)?

There are two types of contempt for the audience books. The first is the book that despises readers of, say, Jordan. They try to write a novel that would appeal to Jordan readers just so they can slap them over the head with the ending, in which they negate everything they were saying. Although I can't imagine an editor saying "Don't tell your readers to go to Hell" I *can* imagine them saying "the payoff here is all wrong". Which is to say, there's some editorial/publishing filtering going on.

Oh, and how do you know "Dust" didn't work for the intended audience? Was there a survey? Just curious

Yes <g>. the survey would be on-line reviews, even amazon. I really didn't get any positive feedback on that story until way after it had been published. I was interested in that time period because I was interested in what happened between the end of the two seasons; the licensor's decision was that she was happy & spunky while in LA, and it was only when she got back that she went through her PTS. And, as it's their universe, this is their right, so I didn't argue that at all; it wasn't how I felt the character would have been emotionally grounded, and the story I wrote was darker than I think the general readers would have liked.

[stakebait.livejournal.com]

*boggles* Who sets out to write a bad book? Gah, it's hard enough to write a good book. The idea of spending all of that time writing badly on purpose is mindblowing.

It'd be one thing to say "I wrote a book that was the best I could do, and I like it, but it got rejected so now I'm looking for a publisher with lower -- or at least different -- standards." Or even "I wrote a book which was the best I could do then, I can do better now but I can't improve *it* any further and I'd rather sell it than trunk it, so who might not mind so much?"

That's insulting to the editor, but it doesn't make me wonder if they've gone mad. Even if Luna were just as bad as they imply, don't they care what readers will think of them ever after?

Which isn't to say I've never toyed with the thought of writing a formula romance to dip my toe in the water. But that's because a) formula = training wheels or at least a railing to clutch and b) being in a genre that's not where I dream of making a career lowers the flub fear. I can always take a new psuedonym and start over. Those people don't know me. It doesn't mean I have contempt for the readers. I am the readers. That's why I know the formula.

I've read, at this point, about six ARCs from the Luna line. All have been competant and well written in terms of style. Only one I thought was really well built fantasy, but that one was damned good. Though so unresolved I can only assume it's the first in a series.

The other suffered from a dearth of real 3-D characters other than the prospective couple. And sometimes from some fairly Standard Fantasy Elements which would have been best off explained less or made less standard.

But on the whole, I was surprised and impressed by how seriously they're taking the fantastic aspects compared to the usual supernatural Deus Ex Machina romance. I'll definitely read more of them as they come my way.

Perhaps they consider it an 'easy in'

[irysangel.livejournal.com]

Into an otherwise normally difficult market? Perhaps the perception is that because Harlequin is a romance publisher...

Luna = Romance
Romance = dumber audience
Dumber Audience = so easy to write anyone can do it
Therefore...

Luna = easy to get published?

It's obviously not true, but I can't help but think that people that haven't researched their markets, read the books, etc, will have this skewed concept. Heck, if the majority of writers can't be trusted to do a proper submission, they certainly won't be bothering to realize WHY this assumption is so wrong.

As for myself, all my stories are a blend of fantasy and romance (I like to think equal parts of both). I tried to do 'pure romance' and found that I loathed that book. I had to force myself to finish it, and even looking at it a year later for revision, I still hate it. It's obvious to me (and would be to readers) that my passion was not in the book. I can read crappy Elfquest fanfiction that I wrote 10 years ago and the passion was there, and the story was entertaining, if not grammatically wondrous.

That being said, will the half-baked novels even get to the next round? I doubt it.

Where am I going with this again?

[pixelfish.livejournal.com]

Ran smack into that very attitude you describe here:

http://maisonneuve.org/blog/index.php?itemid=363

(It's not his assessment of PDK that annoys me, but his general attitude towards SF.)

[oldmotherchaos.livejournal.com]

Bleurgh. How horrible and patronising.

Nothing much more I can say that others haven't already said, with greater eloquence than I can muster this evening.

[lunamoth42.livejournal.com]

As someone else said, not much I can add that others haven't. I was actually pointed toward the Luna line, not to write something specifically for them, but the pointer-outer (yes, it's a word - it's MY word) was suggesting that a novel I have already written might be well received by them. Reading the guidelines and the synopses of those carried already gives me inspiration that they might indeed be interested. After all, not all of us are writing Tolkien or Conan the Barbarian. Some actually want to see *women* being the strong characters.

Wow, said more than I meant to. :-\

[irian.livejournal.com]

Uh-oh. Now that you mentioned Luna, I'm one of the skeptics about that line. The author lineup is impressive though, and I liked the summaries for the stories that have been published so far.

I wrote an entry in my LJ with my thoughts about this new line, and what I *hope* will happen and will not happen to the books published under this imprint here, if you're interested:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/irian/90456.html

Romance in fantasy I can stand. purple prose in fantasy, though, is a different matter. And the honest truth is that even the hardcore romance readers laugh at how extremely purple some passges in romance novels become.

Anyway, I'd like to friend you if that's OK with you.

[msagara.livejournal.com]

Anyway, I'd like to friend you if that's OK with you.

I'm happy to have you friend me -- as per in info page, I consider this a public page, and won't be offended if anyone else who is lurking adds me to their friends list <g>.

Uh-oh. Now that you mentioned Luna, I'm one of the skeptics about that line. The author lineup is impressive though, and I liked the summaries for the stories that have been published so far.

Just so we're clear: I don't have any investment in Luna other than my novels; I'm responsible for my content <wry g>. Each Luna novel so far has been very different in tone and feel. STAYING DEAD hasn't got a lot of romance in it, although there's relationship tension (it's also the first contemporary fantasy); there is no romance in my first Luna novel. There's much more prominent romance in the Zettel, which is also an Arthurian (and you might want to point out to someone in your thread that there's a difference between Sara Douglass and Sarah Zettel, since they don't seem to have noticed the difference). Judging them book by book is probably wiser.

Romance in fantasy I can stand. purple prose in fantasy, though, is a different matter. And the honest truth is that even the hardcore romance readers laugh at how extremely purple some passges in romance novels become.

I don't like bad writing in anything. Bad writing is often a matter of convention, but not always.

[next-bold-move.livejournal.com]

I have recently become an abuser of my library card. I think I have 30 items checked out, at the moment, and the last trip I checked out two books from the "New Arrivals" section. When I got them home, they turned out to be LUNA books. I've been wanting to try out the line, but I think it speaks well for the books that I didn't get them because they were LUNA; I checked them out because they caught my interest on their own merit. Once I finish "Quicksilver" I'll be on to "Silver's Edge" or "The Wizard's Ward."

Also, this may have been mentioned above, but Stephen King says something similar to this in "On Writing." That to write in a genre you don't love just becuase you think there's money in it is dishonest, and pointless, because your readers will sniff out your disdain and won't buy your book. That struck me as I was reading it today on the bus, and so I thought I would excavate this thread. :)